Welcome to DBSTalk

Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!

Reports can be wrong. My understanding is that churn in LA was lower than expected.

I doubt it. If the status quo was working and no one was leaving then why would you add the channel? After all this time, really think so? I do not.

While Directv did gain some customers last quarter we have no idea where they were gained at. 66K gained, probably most gained because of NFL Sunday Ticket. Now that window has passed and there is little upcoming to entice someone to Directv. Let's face it, having satellite is a hassle, plain and simple. But for sports we come and we accept. Directv offered, at one point, more sports than everyone else. Now that's just not true. NFL aside, they do not.

Some say Pac 12 Network is not designed for satellite and its hard to make it work according to plan. Ok, even if I accept that, that is yet another thing I give up by having Directv.

Here in Portland Directv refuses to carry CSN-NW - they say because of cost - but paying attention Root Sports (100% owned by Directv) charges more for less overall content available! So another knock on satellite.

Satellite is just not the same anymore. In order to really make it work you need to charge just a little less than cable - the hassle factor - or you need to offer more content to overcome the hassle factor.

I doubt it. If the status quo was working and no one was leaving then why would you add the channel? After all this time, really think so? I do not.

While Directv did gain some customers last quarter we have no idea where they were gained at. 66K gained, probably most gained because of NFL Sunday Ticket. Now that window has passed and there is little upcoming to entice someone to Directv. Let's face it, having satellite is a hassle, plain and simple. But for sports we come and we accept. Directv offered, at one point, more sports than everyone else. Now that's just not true. NFL aside, they do not.

Some say Pac 12 Network is not designed for satellite and its hard to make it work according to plan. Ok, even if I accept that, that is yet another thing I give up by having Directv.

Here in Portland Directv refuses to carry CSN-NW - they say because of cost - but paying attention Root Sports (100% owned by Directv) charges more for less overall content available! So another knock on satellite.

Satellite is just not the same anymore. In order to really make it work you need to charge just a little less than cable - the hassle factor - or you need to offer more content to overcome the hassle factor.

Okay. I am dealing with something I was told as fact and you are dealing in conjecture.

CSN NW had more content than Root? Hahaha.

Keep claiming they are doomed. As they keep making money and increase their customer base through a recession.

Spin all you want. Your diatribe about Root has been proven wrong over and over again (the loss of a PAC 12 game a week makes it a parttime channel).

And your thought processes over what is worth what are weak. TWC is obviously worth more than some other channels and yet it is a "part time" channel by your definition with far less content than Root. But you criticized directv for not having it.

CSN is Comcast. It is not an accident that the vast majority of channels directv does not have are Comcast. But that fact does not fit your agenda.

All of this Comcast channels have been on a long time, essentially legacies from the time when Directv (and Dish) were doing their best to lure customers. CSN Cal, CSN bay Area are former Fox outlets that were merged into Comcast. To my knowledge no new RSNs (besides the Lakers) have been added to Directv in over 6 or 7 years, except FSN San Diego - and that's likely because I understand Directv pulled off Prime Ticket at the same time from it's system for San Diego customers.

You are right I didn't know the whole situation with the whole state, etc. That's fine. I think that works backwards for you guys. The MORE distribution a channel has the MORE cost it has. Let's face it, a guy in Houston may be OK with paying more to watch the Rockets....but is a guy in Midland, Odessa, El Paso,etc. just as interested in seeing his bill go up?

Eyeballs certainly helped LA gets its sports channel for one team. Im not sure that it would any different here.

This state is very... in love with itself. I guess that's a fair way to say it. Texas loves it some Texas, and it loves its teams. It's a state pride thing. I'm not saying its right or rational, I'm just calling a spade a spade. Ever been to West Texas? Some desolate country right there - sports is about all those guys have EVEN if its from Houston or Dallas. Yes - they care.

To my knowledge no new RSNs (besides the Lakers) have been added to Directv in over 6 or 7 years, except FSN San Diego - and that's likely because I understand Directv pulled off Prime Ticket at the same time from it's system for San Diego customers.

Nice cherry picking of data. Basically there have not been many new RSNs since the mid 2000s when SNY and MASN were formed so your years are well chosen.

All of this Comcast channels have been on a long time, essentially legacies from the time when Directv (and Dish) were doing their best to lure customers. CSN Cal, CSN bay Area are former Fox outlets that were merged into Comcast. To my knowledge no new RSNs (besides the Lakers) have been added to Directv in over 6 or 7 years, except FSN San Diego - and that's likely because I understand Directv pulled off Prime Ticket at the same time from it's system for San Diego customers.

FSSD and Prime Ticket are mirrors of each other, with the exception of Padres broadcasts and perhaps the occasional SDSU or USD hoops broadcast. Clippers, Ducks, Chivas are seen on both channels. The Dodgers would be blacked out anyway in SD, hence the Padres. The argument that Prime Ticket was pulled for San Diego customers is a red herring, at best, because there is no need to present both channels for the SD DMA.

You are always going to lose your arguments on here because all you do is present conjecture and incorrect "facts."

I doubt it. If the status quo was working and no one was leaving then why would you add the channel? After all this time, really think so? I do not.

While Directv did gain some customers last quarter we have no idea where they were gained at. 66K gained, probably most gained because of NFL Sunday Ticket. Now that window has passed and there is little upcoming to entice someone to Directv. Let's face it, having satellite is a hassle, plain and simple. But for sports we come and we accept. Directv offered, at one point, more sports than everyone else. Now that's just not true. NFL aside, they do not.

Some say Pac 12 Network is not designed for satellite and its hard to make it work according to plan. Ok, even if I accept that, that is yet another thing I give up by having Directv.

Here in Portland Directv refuses to carry CSN-NW - they say because of cost - but paying attention Root Sports (100% owned by Directv) charges more for less overall content available! So another knock on satellite.

Satellite is just not the same anymore. In order to really make it work you need to charge just a little less than cable - the hassle factor - or you need to offer more content to overcome the hassle factor.

Because churn would likely be low for a while, but by the time January hits, they would have seen larger and larger losses. The old saying is that the NBA season really doesn't start till Christmas day. That's partly because till then we have college football and pro football also all the time. As toughs sports dissipate and end, basketball reves up, and people would have been tired of waiting by then. Everyone can sit tight for a little while, but at some point this season, the exodus and I want a massive discount so I can afford TWC as well phone calls would have picked up pace. Luckily, we don't have to see that now!

Okay. I am dealing with something I was told as fact and you are dealing in conjecture.

CSN NW had more content than Root? Hahaha.

Keep claiming they are doomed. As they keep making money and increase their customer base through a recession.

Spin all you want. Your diatribe about Root has been proven wrong over and over again (the loss of a PAC 12 game a week makes it a parttime channel).

And your thought processes over what is worth what are weak. TWC is obviously worth more than some other channels and yet it is a "part time" channel by your definition with far less content than Root. But you criticized directv for not having it.

CSN is Comcast. It is not an accident that the vast majority of channels directv does not have are Comcast. But that fact does not fit your agenda.

You can spin it however you want. It is a fact with Root that there is very little content on the channel and the rate is close to $2.50 a month (don't fall on the "average" costs because that includes all of those .10 out of market customers watering it down). The fact is that revenues have grown 9% a year for Root NW, slightly above the average RSN increase of 8% annually. It's fact that Mike White wants all the other sports channels to go on a specialty tier, but not his owned channels. He could lead the way, but he does not. There is nothing wrong about these statements.

As for Comcast, it takes two to find common ground. Neither has because of their self interest. Comcast keeps its rates up because it does not want competitors showing the channel. Directv does not want CSN NW because its' a competitor to its own channel and by giving more viewers it might up the value of the channel and the cost. In reality the two channels probably have enough programming to cover one channel.

This is why content providers should not be allowed to own channels and this is my opinion.

You need to think outside the box. I realize you are a tech guy who understands tech stuff, but that is where your expertise stops. You are probably really good at hooking up all the equipment, trouble shooting it, etc.

You can spin it however you want. It is a fact with Root that there is very little content on the channel and the rate is close to $2.50 a month (don't fall on the "average" costs because that includes all of those .10 out of market customers watering it down). The fact is that revenues have grown 9% a year for Root NW, slightly above the average RSN increase of 8% annually. It's fact that Mike White wants all the other sports channels to go on a specialty tier, but not his owned channels. He could lead the way, but he does not. There is nothing wrong about these statements.

As for Comcast, it takes two to find common ground. Neither has because of their self interest. Comcast keeps its rates up because it does not want competitors showing the channel. Directv does not want CSN NW because its' a competitor to its own channel and by giving more viewers it might up the value of the channel and the cost. In reality the two channels probably have enough programming to cover one channel.

This is why content providers should not be allowed to own channels and this is my opinion.

You need to think outside the box. I realize you are a tech guy who understands tech stuff, but that is where your expertise stops. You are probably really good at hooking up all the equipment, trouble shooting it, etc.

You can spin it however you want. It is a fact with Root that there is very little content on the channel and the rate is close to $2.50 a month (don't fall on the "average" costs because that includes all of those .10 out of market customers watering it down). The fact is that revenues have grown 9% a year for Root NW, slightly above the average RSN increase of 8% annually. It's fact that Mike White wants all the other sports channels to go on a specialty tier, but not his owned channels. He could lead the way, but he does not. There is nothing wrong about these statements.

As for Comcast, it takes two to find common ground. Neither has because of their self interest. Comcast keeps its rates up because it does not want competitors showing the channel. Directv does not want CSN NW because its' a competitor to its own channel and by giving more viewers it might up the value of the channel and the cost. In reality the two channels probably have enough programming to cover one channel.

This is why content providers should not be allowed to own channels and this is my opinion.

You need to think outside the box. I realize you are a tech guy who understands tech stuff, but that is where your expertise stops. You are probably really good at hooking up all the equipment, trouble shooting it, etc.

Absolutely. By denying the competition access it reduces the overall eyeballs. By reducing access to the competitor channel it prevents the competitor from meaningful competition in many cases. Root lost the Blazers because Comcast outbid them, but Comcast cannot get its channel on many systems. The whole uproar with the Blazers may prevent a team from considering Csn since its fans may have issues with the availability of the channel.

Absolutely. By denying the competition access it reduces the overall eyeballs. By reducing access to the competitor channel it prevents the competitor from meaningful competition in many cases. Root lost the Blazers because Comcast outbid them, but Comcast cannot get its channel on many systems. The whole uproar with the Blazers may prevent a team from considering Csn since its fans may have issues with the availability of the channel.

Wow. You are out there.

Root was owned by Fox when csn got the contract. And Comcast demanded huge fees.

Root means next to nothing to directv. They don't even common brand.

And there is no competition. Root is primarily baseball while CSN is basketball.

Root was owned by Fox when csn got the contract. And Comcast demanded huge fees.

Root means next to nothing to directv. They don't even common brand.

And there is no competition. Root is primarily baseball while CSN is basketball.

Huh? Root showed the Supersonics and lost the Trail Blazers to Comcast when they were outbid. So tell me how there is no competiton between the channels when they both bid on the Portland Trail Blazers and CSN prevailed - taking the Blazers from Root/FSN? Your statement makes no sense at all, none.

Yes, Root is just baseball NOW, but years ago they had two NBA teams, a baseball team, four Pac 10 universities, plus Gonzaga baseketball and on and on. It was so much content they used a secondary channel on many occasions.

Yes, Root was owned by Fox when it got the contract AND Directv was also owned by Fox when it got the contract. Then when Directv split from News Corp, Root Sports (aka Liberty Media) was part of the split of news corp. The split wss Directv plus wholly owned Liberty Media into a new company.

Talk about cherry picking facts, you lead the league buddy in that regard.

Huh? Root showed the Supersonics and lost the Trail Blazers to Comcast when they were outbid. So tell me how there is no competiton between the channels when they both bid on the Portland Trail Blazers and CSN prevailed - taking the Blazers from Root/FSN? Your statement makes no sense at all, none.

Yes, Root is just baseball NOW, but years ago they had two NBA teams, a baseball team, four Pac 10 universities, plus Gonzaga baseketball and on and on. It was so much content they used a secondary channel on many occasions.

Yes, Root was owned by Fox when it got the contract AND Directv was also owned by Fox when it got the contract. Then when Directv split from News Corp, Root Sports (aka Liberty Media) was part of the split of news corp. The split wss Directv plus wholly owned Liberty Media into a new company.

Talk about cherry picking facts, you lead the league buddy in that regard.

Simply put TonyD79, you are simply wrong on this one.

Again you have no clue about big companies.

Fox? You mean the company that has the totally conservative Fox News and the immensely liberal Fox TV network that takes open swipes at Fox News?

I give up. You have no idea how businesses are run and think everything is a conspiracy. Wonder why directv would have channels that repeat Root programming like college sports if they want everyone to watch Root only.

Everything to you is a conspiracy. Directv would love to have the blazers games n their system. That brings them customers. For the right price. Just like the laker games.

And all that matters is NOW. Deny CSN because of a deal made years ago? And yet CSN has been a problem for everyone after they got the Blazers.

I am not cherry picking anything. The Blazers themselves complained about CSN pricing. But, if course, it is all about eyeballs for Root on Thursday night in January. Riiiiight.

No, this is totally made up because the original poster is citing the cost for CSN-Washington DC, NOT CSN-NW.

Check it out yourself, but YES this is totally made up by some of you. Might want to wipe the egg of your face now.

Yeah. Made up.

On June 21, 2010, the Trail Blazers asked the Federal Communications Commission to require Comcast Corp. to make Trail Blazers games available to competing multichannel programming distributors such as DirecTV and Dish Network.[13]

One Oregon cable company, Canby Telcom, has objected to the additional annual charge in excess of $32 being required to be charged per customer in 2012 and has announced plans to stop carrying the channel.[8] Canby Telcom President Keith Galitz is quoted as saying "That's just too steep an increase for us, and it's not in line with inflation or normal escalation of prices in the industry."[8] Clear Creek Television, which carried the Trail Blazers for 15 years, was rebuffed when even attempting to negotiate the above-market rate Comcast pushed at Clear Creek.[8]

"Comcast clearly sees the public perception of its treatment of sports fans as a potential Achilles heel in efforts to acquire NBCU", said Sports Fan Coalition Executive Director Brian Frederick, discussing how Comcast sent senior staff members to Oregon when a member of the Sports Fan Coalition testified before the Oregon Legislature on Comcast's denial of access to hundreds of thousands of customers of DirecTV, Dish, and other cable operators.[14]

In a November 7, 2010 article, Blazers CEO Larry Miller continued to express frustration about the lack of availability.[15]

All with citations.

Oh, and the decision for fsn to not have the Bkazers was Fox's as the blazers upped the asking price by three times. More actual reporting. Not your fantasy conjecture.